Why is anything unethical? I'm not going down the rabbit hole of ethics if there is a wide chasm about first principles. Inflicting suffering and death on defenseless baby animals for the purposes of making profits from the fashion industry is unbelievably gratuitous, and gratuitous pain and suffering is unethical. The least unethical killing of animals is done because you need the meat to survive. Humans don't need meat to survive generally and they don't even eat seal meat. The meat simply rots. They are killed because some rich snobs think they look stylish in furs, which gives me an ulcer just thinking about it.

I'm pretty sure they eat the meat and use the oil.

But going down your line or arguing, if the seals were killed humanely, it would be no less ethical than any other meat production. And, the fact that they live free before they're killed would make the meat ever more ethical.

Really, you're saying we should be vegetarian, no? Out of interest, are you vegetarian?

Basically, what I'm seeing is: I'm for animal rights as long as they already have those rights and/or I can't find an example of an allowed behavior that is worse.

SD, I really don't think that's where I stand.

The crux of what I'm saying now is this:
Imho, bludgeoning seals to death is an inhumane way of killing them. However, if they were killing in a more humane manner, I don't know what is wrong with the seal hunt.

The mention of other meat production is because, to some vegetarians, it's inhumane to eat animals regardless of how you kill them. That's not quite where I am so I was wondering if that's the source of the disconnect between myself and Putin at the moment.

"you're callous pieces of human excrement:

Ad hominem much?

"They are killed because some rich snobs think they look stylish in furs, which gives me an ulcer just thinking about it."

I agree. Killing an animal just for fashion is pretty awful.

"I'm pretty sure they eat the meat and use the oil."

Canada cannot find any buyers for seal meat. Even their efforts to sell it to China don't seem to be working. If you're referring to the aboriginal population, they don't do most of the seal hunting.

"Really, you're saying we should be vegetarian, no? Out of interest, are you vegetarian?"

Not completely, no. There are some nutrients the body needs that cannot be adequately provided with a vegetarian diet alone, such as B12.

So, this baby seal walks into a club...

But with that said, I don't think human nutrition requires the vast animal product industry, the animal product industry can be reduced to a minimal level and meet human needs just fine.

"Ad hominem much?"

I'm sorry I hurt the feelings of people who think animal torture is funny.

As usual, I stand corrected. You are correct that most of the meat is not used. Well, the seal hunt doesn't have much leg to stand on then, does it?

So, I've refined my position further.
I'd support licensing native's to kill seals (without bludgeoning them) as they seem to eat them. Beyond that, it's pretty unnecessary business. Really, like abg said, it's really unnecessary to kill an animal if you're not eating it.

And, regarding vitamins, this is wonder of the modern age. You don't need to get your vitamins from your diet. Supplements exists so I think that's a rather weak argument against being vegetarian.

"And, regarding vitamins, this is wonder of the modern age. You don't need to get your vitamins from your diet. Supplements exists so I think that's a rather weak argument against being vegetarian."

Here's a real argument against being vegetarian. I like eating meat. In fact, I *love* eating meat. I like buying meat, I like cooking meat, and I like eating meat. I really, truly, genuinely do not care what they do to the animals before I eat them. There are more important things to worry about.

However, I am strongly against cruelty to animals that we aren't eating, especially to wild animals. I'm against seal clubbing (the kind where they die, not the kind where they're just getting down) and especially whaling and dolphining (I realize you can eat whale and dolphin, but I just really like those animals).

The absorption capacity of people for supplements doesn't seem to be very high, but I concede it's a weak argument.

Screw it... Fucking browser.

I had a nice message typed up with a real explanation why being a vegan or vegetarian isn't really all that practical considering our bodies and mouths make us omnivores, but the damn browser lost it.

Suffice it to say, though, there are non-meat soruces of most of the protiens for vegetarians as many are found in dairy products. and for vegans, soy has many of the missing vitamins. For instance, 2 cups of soy milk a day has enough B12 in it naturally to meet your bodies needs.

That said, I like meat. I like steaks and chicken and fish and turkey and eggs and pork and shellfish and venison and wild game hens and... I like meat.

ctrl+a, ctrl+c

It could save your life.

Recognize.

I actually did that, but the browser hung so bad I had to use task manager to close it and that lost the clipboard copy. Pissed me off.

PrtScn

It could save your life.

Recognize.

LOL! I still would have had to retype it... No, I should have done:
Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C, open notepad, Ctrl-V. That would have saved my life.

@ Draug, while we might have evolved/been designed as omnivores do you not think that the time might be fast approaching when vegetarianism might be the pragmatic choice? Given the ever increasing world population and the largely* inefficient practice of meat consumption in overall energy terms.

* I agree that there are some exceptions e.g., sheep rearing in upland areas.

No, I actually don't. Our bodies need natural B12 and other nutrients and we don't optimally process vitamin supplements to get these. Now, do I think workign away from beef and pork (and even chicken) back to a fish-based diet is pragmatic? Sure, but pragmatic realism does not convert into emotional acceptance of the populace.

I don't see how the "I like meat" rationale is functionally different than the "I like white seal fur" rationale.

"Sure, but pragmatic realism does not convert into emotional acceptance of the populace."

They said the same thing about the smoking bans.

@Putin

I think there are 2 differences between eating meat and clubbing baby seals:

1) Eating meat is a pleasure, but it also fulfills a requirement needed to survive. It's not the only way fulfill that requirement, but it is one.

2) Cattle/Chicken have been bred for generations specifically for eating. There is no danger of them being extinct and I really don't think they'd survive in the wild. The same is not true of seals.


Re: smoking. Again, Smoking was purely a luxury, unlike meat.

@ putin
just because I dont support PETA doesnt mean I do support the mistreatment of animals.
why on earth would you assume so?

@ putin, yes you're right, optimal (context, health) human meat consumption is something like 8%. Maybe 6%, but I think 6% is chimpanzees

"just because I dont support PETA doesnt mean I do support the mistreatment of animals."

LOL Let's get one thing straight. PETA is FUCKING INSANE. Your view on PETA has no bearing on your view of animals.

"yes you're right, optimal (context, health) human meat consumption is something like 8%."

8% of animals? Man, I need to step it up! : )

8% of total diet being meat based protein, though I suspect you understood.

Putin... you are assuming I am complicit.approve of/am apathetic towards animal cruelty, because I dont support a group that thinks its worthwhile to bitch about a 20 year old video-game character in a raccoon costume. do you realize this?

@ Abg

"1) Eating meat is a pleasure, but it also fulfills a requirement needed to survive. It's not the only way fulfill that requirement, but it is one."

Clothing/warmth is also a requirement needed to survive. Fur is not the only way to fulfill that requirement, but it is one, and one that could be considered more efficient in providing warmth in cold climates than meat is efficient at meeting dietary needs.

"2) Cattle/Chicken have been bred for generations specifically for eating. There is no danger of them being extinct and I really don't think they'd survive in the wild. The same is not true of seals."

There are a number of species of wild cattle and wild chicken. But anyway, the idea that unspeakable cruelty to cows and chicken is tolerable simply because we've bred them for the sole purpose of torturing and slaughtering them isn't persuasive to me.

"Fur is not the only way to fulfill that requirement, but it is one, and one that could be considered more efficient in providing warmth in cold climates than meat is efficient at meeting dietary needs. "

I agree, but do rich socialites actually use that fur for warmth? As far as I know, not really. In fact, a lot of them are shawls or other such items that don't really provide warmth at all.

"But anyway, the idea that unspeakable cruelty to cows and chicken is tolerable simply because we've bred them for the sole purpose of torturing and slaughtering them isn't persuasive to me."

And that's OK to me, because I'm not trying to convince you to eat meat.